Ping IT guys - XP 100% CPU question

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by ~misfit~, Dec 13, 2013.

  1. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    You're a complete idiot if you believe the anti-malware software
    actually stops every piece of malware. That's not even remotely
    possible. :-\

    Yep, the so-called anti-malware software (well-known and used by
    millions of people all over the world) which didn't actually recognise
    nor stop the malware.

    It's not just my mother's computer either. Someone else I know had a
    laptop that was infested with malware, again depsite running well-known
    and properly updated anti-malware applications.

    If you've got a Windows PC and it's not still in the box, then you
    almost certainly have got some sort of malware installed without you
    knowing, whether or not your anti-malware application sees it.
    Your Name, Dec 16, 2013
    1. Advertisements

  2. ~misfit~

    ~misfit~ Guest

    I forgot to mention the obvious vector for infection; Email attatchments. I
    just deleted an email 2 minutes ago that looked perfectly harmless. It was
    titled 'Lawnmowing Invoice' and had a jpg attachment. I junked it straight
    away as I mow my own lawns etc.

    Even if you limit your emails to a known group, unless they are all computer
    savvy all it takes is one of those people to get an infection and for it to
    email itself out to the address book....

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1).
    [Sent from my OrbitalT ocular implant interface]
    ~misfit~, Dec 16, 2013
    1. Advertisements

  3. ~misfit~

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Yup. I am constantly amazed at some people's attitude to computers and good
    practice. I have a step brother who has been using computers for over 10
    years now (maintained by me until recently when I told him to go fly a kite)
    who constantly says he knows nothing about them - which is a
    self-fullfilling prophecy. It gives him an excuse to be computer
    illiterate... "I told you I don't know anything about them..."

    I understand they can be a bit daunting at first - I knew nothing about them
    when I got my first one. However it doesn't take long - or much effort - to
    learn enough so that you don't need to keep calling in the services of a
    'computer person'. (Actually I never did. Instead I bought a subscription to
    a PC magazine the day I bought my first 486 "IBM compatible" to replace the
    Amiga in the early 90s. In those days computer magazines were actually about
    computers/ing, not full of gadget reviews. All it took was a couple of hours
    a month reading a magazine and I never looked back.)

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1).
    [Sent from my OrbitalT ocular implant interface]
    ~misfit~, Dec 16, 2013
  4. ~misfit~

    ~misfit~ Guest

    As soon as MS say they're no longer going to issue 'updates' and patches to
    fix vulnerabilities it's going to become open season on XP for malware
    authors - who are going to dedicate more time to looking for loopholes and
    back doors with the knowledge there they won't be a 'use until patch
    Tuesday' small window of opportunity for any resulting exploit.

    If this happens responsible XP users will have to run so much anti-malware
    that it will likely bog the machine down making it unusable as every process
    will need to be examined by an extremely complex anti-malware suite. In fact
    it's highly likely that most anti-malware companies will decide to wash
    their hands of the forseeable clusterfusk and also declare that they no
    longer support XP at about the same time MS does.

    MS need to be held responsible for a product that people bought in good
    faith (usually with little choice) and, at the very least continue to issue
    patches it. They made billions from XP - I don't think that they should just
    be allowed to leave ~30% of computer users worldwide to the mercies of
    malware writers. As I said, a lot of hardware from the XP era is still
    working and doing what people want from it - but isn't up to running MS'
    later OSes (or doesn't have drivers available for them - or they don't run
    the software people are using with XP).

    MS should have seen this coming... In fact they probably did but being based
    in the US they'll likely not be held responsible and millions of otherwise
    fine PCs will end up being dumped worldwide as a panic that will make the
    'Y2K bug' look like takes hold... If the installed base of computers stays
    about the same and XP isn't patched then it won't be long before there is a
    massive 'pool' of infected machines out there - which will in turn make it
    harder and harder for the computer-savvy folks running XP (with internet
    access) to keep their machines clean.

    MS' best bet, if they really are going to stop patching, is to give the
    complete code for XP to a trusted company (or a small internal team) who
    undertake to keep it safe from major new exploits - perhaps charging users
    microtransactions (or a subscription) for continued support. There are
    millions of people in developing countries (like NZ <g>) who simply can't
    afford to replace their computers just because MS 'set a date'.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1).
    [Sent from my OrbitalT ocular implant interface]
    ~misfit~, Dec 16, 2013
  5. ~misfit~

    victor Guest

    How do you know ?
    victor, Dec 16, 2013
    Bruce Sinclair, Dec 17, 2013
  7. Exactly. But people don't listen. I've known people who have been told
    not to plug stuff or opening emails hundreds of times and who still get
    infected by plugging stuff in or opening emails. They even switch the
    antivirus off (if they are allowed to) because it wouldn't allow them to
    plug stuff in or open emails.[/QUOTE]

    *Never* underestimate the stupidity of people. Whenever someone invents
    something that's idiot proof, we rush out and invent a better idiot. :) :)
    Bruce Sinclair, Dec 17, 2013
  8. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    There's numerous ways to get malware and no way to stop it all ...
    except to not use Windoze. :)
    Your Name, Dec 17, 2013
  9. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest


    Most people shouldn't have to know anything other than waht they need
    to be able to do whatever they want to do. Same as most drivers don't
    know anything about cars. That's what the (usually over-paid and often
    knows barely more than the user) "expert" is for.
    Your Name, Dec 17, 2013
  10. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Your Name, Dec 17, 2013
  11. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Not likely. The number of security holes left (even by Microsoft's
    buggy standards) will be tiny, the number of users shrinking. Most of
    the malware makers go after the new euqipment since that's likely to
    have the most holes and the growing number of users.

    It's simply not possible for any company to continue supporting a
    product forever. There are nuemerous people out there still happily
    using their Amiga, C64 and Apple II computers, but they haven't been
    officically supported for years.

    Apple stop supporting old versions of their operating system as well.
    Adobe stops supporting old versions of their software, etc., etc.

    It's no different in any other industry. Car makers eventually stop
    making spares for a particular model even though there may well still
    be quite a few of them still on the roads.

    Even something as simple as a cupboard door hinge - we have trouble
    getting new ones because nobody stocks the brand the builder used when
    he built this house. The only place to get them is importer, and it's
    anyone's guess how long they will still have some. (I have no idae what
    other people around this area do since all the houses were built by the
    same company using the same products - it's likely some couldn't find
    the hinges and got new doors with different hinges.)

    Epson stopped making ink cartridges for my printer years ago, so I had
    to start using "compatible" ones (until the printer broke, partly due
    to blocked nozzles probably thanks to "compatible" inks).

    The list is endless. :)
    Your Name, Dec 17, 2013
  12. ~misfit~

    Enkidu Guest

    You are actually in a lot better situation than that. All major easily
    found holes will be already fixed so there shouldn't be that many new
    ones found. Also malware and antivirus software works on files, not on
    security holes so not much should change there either. It will be like
    NT4 with SP6A - rock solid and pretty safe. The virus writers will move
    on to attack later versions of Windows as many non-business machines get
    recycled and they lose their old botnet machines.


    Enkidu, Dec 17, 2013
  13. ~misfit~

    Enkidu Guest

    Lennier, I didn't say that. My point was, in case you missed it, that
    anti-virus software finds viruses running under svchost.exe with no more
    difficulty than any other infection.
    Bollocks, again. If you include adware included with games and so on,
    that can get on to your computer but if you run something like
    Malwarebytes it *will* find it, if it's been out more than a day or so.

    If you or your mother, Lennier, are part of a botnet, it is your
    problem, not the software.


    Enkidu, Dec 17, 2013
  14. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Yes, which means it can miss them just as easily as it misses other
    malware ... which is what I said in the first place.

    When malware gets installed and wasn't seen or stopped or removed by
    the so-called anti-maleware applications, then it *IS* the software's
    fault. They claim to stop malware from being installed, and the reality
    is that they don't stop it all, they can't and never will.

    Anti-malware applications are partly a con (especially those you pay
    over-priced annual subscriptions for!) ... they make novices and fools
    think they're computer is safe simply by showing a nice "green light"
    and saying everything is "hunky-dory" ... when the reality is that none
    of the anti-malware applications actually see nor stop ALL the malware.

    The only way to not have malware on your computer (other than leaving
    it in the box), is to not use Windoze. The alternative operating
    systems are much safer, partly because there's far fewer users so the
    hacker scum are less likely to target them,
    Your Name, Dec 17, 2013

  15. latest Info
    Frank Williams, Dec 17, 2013
  16. ~misfit~

    Enkidu Guest

    You imply that it misses a lot. It doesn't. Modern antivirus and
    ant-malware software is pretty good and gets probably 99.999% of
    infections. An increasing number it cuts off at the pass, detecting the
    viruses attempt to install itself. I haven't seen a serious infection
    for years and most these days are nagware or data gathering. If you are
    continually being infected you are doing something wrong.
    Rubbish. Antimalware software does exactly what it says on the packet.
    The heuristics are getting better and better at stopping infections by
    threats which have not yet been added to the threats database.


    Enkidu, Dec 17, 2013
  17. ~misfit~

    victor Guest

    Security by obscurity is the worst option.
    victor, Dec 17, 2013
  18. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Anti-malware can intercept what it already knows about. Anything new
    will and does get through. It's stops nowhere near 99.999%, more like
    80%, if you're lucky.

    Yet again - NO anti-malware software stops ALL malware getting through
    .... it can't, it's impossible. Anyone who believes it does is simply an
    idiot. End of story. :-\
    Your Name, Dec 17, 2013
  19. ~misfit~

    Your Name Guest

    Utter nonsense.
    Your Name, Dec 17, 2013
  20. Nope. Completely right. The best security systems assume the bad guys know
    everything about your system before they start to crack it/hack it/get into

    That's why things other than windows still make sense, as security has
    generally been properly designed into those systems, rather than an
    attempt made to add stuff on later to fix a problem caused by bad design
    Windows is better now, but it still isn't well. :)
    Bruce Sinclair, Dec 18, 2013
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.